[2025:RJ-JP:22548] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6302/2021 1. Abhilash Soni S/o Surendra Soni, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 125, Main Road, Shivaji Park, Alwar, Rajasthan 2. Maneesh Sharma S/o Suresh Chand Sharma, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Narsingh Das Colony, Vpo, Uchhain, Bharatpur, Rajasthan 3. Anurag Sharma S/o Dr. Vishwanath Sharma, Aged About 30 Years, R/o D-59/255-B-4-S Shivpura Mahmoorgunj, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 4. Nishant Yadav S/o Moninder Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 2/32 Shankar Colony, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan 5. Bhuvnesh Parashar S/o Kishori Lal Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Narshingh Das Colony, Vpo, Uchhain, Bharatpur, Rajasthan 6. Mandeep Kumar S/o Krishan Kumar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o House No. 90, Vimal Kunj, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. 7. Jatin Kumar S/o Ashok Kumar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Lakshmi Nagar, Near Rudraksh Hotel, Narnaul Road, Rewari, Haryana 8. Pargat Singh S/o Mahendra Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village- Ghatasher, P.o. Chilro, Narnaul, Haryana ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Rajasthan Medical Service Corporation Ltd., Swasthya Bhawan, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Amulya Jemini Mr. Kartik Agarwal for Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora For Respondent(s) : Mr. Divanshu Gupta Ms. Subhi Gaur Ms. Tanisha Jhaveri Mr. Bajrang Shekhawat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 28/05/2025 1. Matter has come up on an application (1/2024) filed on behalf of respondents to vacate the interim order passed in ex parte dated 30.06.2021, however, considering the issue involved [2025:RJ-JP:22548] (2 of 4) [CW-6302/2021] in the writ petition and since pleadings are complete, writ petition has been heard finally on merits. 2. The admitted case of petitioners is that their services were engaged on contractual basis as Consultant Biomedical Engineer under the separate agreements. Although, agreement in respect of each petitioner has not been placed on record, however, terms and conditions of contractual appointment are common and one of the condition reads as under:- “The consultant shall not be entitled for any regularization or any special preference in regular recruitment or any other administrative or quasi judicial relief as a consequence of this assignment.” 3. Petitioners have filed instant writ petition with the following prayer:- “(i) Direct the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners as Biomedical Engineers like other employees of the respondents and not hire them under RTPP Act and Rules. (ii) Direct that the petitioners shall not be removed from services by the respondents and shall not be replaced with another set of contractual employees. (iii) Direct that salary, pay scale, financial benefits including increment etc. would be available to the petitioners on same basis as given to Biomedical Engineers under the regular appointment on consideration of equal pay for equal work. (iv) Direct the respondents not to make fresh selections/ appointments in respect of advertisement dated 19.04.2021 (Annexure-14) on the post of the petitioners and to continue the services of the petitioners in respect of posts they are working on. (v) Direct the respondent to accord health insurance and all other financial benefits given to other health and medical employees working as frontline workers during COVID pandemic. (vi) Any other order(s) which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners.” [2025:RJ-JP:22548] (3 of 4) [CW-6302/2021] 4. Counsel for respondents submits that engagement of Consultant Biomedical Engineer on contractual basis was made in accordance with the provision of RTPP Act, 2013 and petitioners cannot claim regularization or continuation of the contract, once the period of contract expires. More so when at the time of appointment, petitioners were well aware about the fix term of period of contract for which their services were engaged and the terms and condition of contractual service, they are estopped claiming a greater relief to continue or regularize their service. 5. Counsel for respondents has further pointed out that interim order dated 30.06.2021 was passed under the facts and circumstances as at that point of time, the State was grapling under the unprecedented situation of pandemic Covid-19 and petitioners in Para No. 28 of the writ petition, took resort of such situation and projected that their services are of emergent nature, hence, in that need of hour, their services may not be allowed to disengage. In backdrop of situation, the interim order dated 30.06.2021 was passed. The interim order dated 30.06.2021 reads as under:- “Issue notice of the writ petition as well as stay application, returnable within eight weeks. In the meanwhile, the petitioner shall not be replaced by another set of contractual employees and his services shall not be discontinued for the said reason.” 6. Having gone through the pleadings of parties and the case of petitioners for claiming regularization of contractual engagement, this Court finds that admittedly, the engagement of petitioners as Consultant Biomedical Engineer is on contract basis, that too for an agreed and limited period as stipulated under their agreements. It is not in dispute that the contractual period of [2025:RJ-JP:22548] (4 of 4) [CW-6302/2021] petitioners has expired. The terms and conditions of the contract appointment as indicated above is that, petitioners would not claim regularization or regular salary. The petitioners are estopped from claiming any greater relief than agreed under the agreement of contract service. The severe situation of pandemic covid-19 is no more persisting. The contractual appointment of petitioners was under RTPP Act, 2013 and no rider can be put on the right of respondents to engage fresh appointment of Consultant on contract basis under the said Act. Petitioners obviously may participate in the fresh recruitment as and when commenced by the respondents under the RTPP Act, 2013. This Court finds that there is no legal or vested right of petitioners, as per their terms and conditions of contract, to claim regularization or regular salary or to continue the contract, without consent of the respondents. 7. As a result, this Court does not find any substance in the prayer made by the petitioners in this writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. 8. Interim order dated 30.06.2021 stands vacated. 9. It is hereby observed that, if respondents would proceed to engage fresh appointment of Consultant Biomedical Engineers, petitioners shall be at liberty to participate in such recruitment process. 10. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /106